Distinguishing grade I meningioma from higher grade meningiomas without biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Many meningiomas are identified by imaging and followed, with an assumption that they are WHO Grade I tumors. The purpose of our investigation is to find clinical or imaging predictors of WHO Grade II/III tumors to distinguish them from Grade I meningiomas. METHODS: Patients with a pathologic diagnosis of meningioma from 2002-2009 were included if they had pre-operative MRI studies and pathology for review. A Neuro-Pathologist reviewed and classified all tumors by WHO 2007. All Brain MRI imaging was reviewed by a Neuro-radiologist. Pathology and Radiology reviews were blinded from each other and clinical course. Recursive partitioning was used to create predictive models for identifying meningioma grades. RESULTS: Factors significantly correlating with a diagnosis of WHO Grade II-III tumors in univariate analysis: prior CVA (p = 0.005), CABG (p = 0.010), paresis (p = 0.008), vascularity index = 4/4: (p = 0.009), convexity vs other (p = 0.014), metabolic syndrome (p = 0.025), non-skull base (p = 0.041) and non-postmenopausal female (p = 0.045). Recursive partitioning analysis identified four categories: 1. prior CVA, 2. vascular index (vi) = 4 (no CVA), 3. premenopausal or male, vi < 4, no CVA. 4. Postmenopausal, vi < 4, no CVA with corresponding rates of 73, 54, 35 and 10% of being Grade II-III meningiomas. CONCLUSIONS: Meningioma patients with prior CVA and those grade 4/4 vascularity are the most likely to have WHO Grade II-III tumors while post-menopausal women without these features are the most likely to have Grade I meningiomas. Further study of the associations of clinical and imaging factors with grade and clinical behavior are needed to better predict behavior of these tumors without biopsy.

Arginase-1, HepPar-1, and Glypican-3 are the most effective panel of markers in distinguishing hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic tumor on fine-needle aspiration specimens.

Distinction of liver metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may present a diagnostic challenge. Arginase-1 (Arg-1) is a marker for HCC recently described in some literature. Immunohistochemical evaluation of Arg-1, hepatocyte paraffin-1 (HepPar-1), and glypican-3 expression was performed on 1,240 surgical specimens and 62 liver fine-needle aspiration specimens (29 HCCs, 28 metastatic tumors, and 5 benign liver cases). The staining results on tissue microarray sections showed that 2.7% and 3.1% of nonhepatic tumor cases were positive for HepPar-1 and glypican-3, respectively; none was positive for Arg-1. For fine-needle aspiration specimens, 19 HCCs were positive for all 3 markers; 9 were positive for 1 or 2 markers; and only 1 case was negative for all 3 markers. These data demonstrate that Arg-1 is the most specific marker in differentiating a non-HCC from HCC. It is recommended to use 3 markers as a panel in distinguishing HCC from metastatic carcinoma.